California analyst: High-speed rail lacks spending details

[alp227]

Source: AP

SACRAMENTO, Calif.

A new $64 billion business plan for California's high-speed rail system fails to identify how to fill a multibillion-dollar shortfall and calls for locating the first segment in an unpopulated agricultural area, which "does not appear to be an effective approach," the state's legislative analyst said Thursday.

"This location would not have the types of facilities and nearby businesses, such as transit connections, rental car facilities, and shops necessary to meet the needs of train passengers," the independent Legislative Analyst's Office said in a report, referring to the first planned end point near the town of Shafter, north of Bakersfield.

The LAO urged state lawmakers to require more detailed planning on the cost, scope and schedule of each high-speed rail segment, noting that the project's every-other-year business plans make numerous changes that make it hard to compare costs over time.

Still, analysts say the rail authority's new plan to first build north to the San Francisco Bay Area instead of to Southern California makes some sense.

Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/article66713782.html

[JDPriestly]

1. The train should be built with two segments first: Sacramento to San Francisgo or Oakland and then

later Los Angeles to San Diego. The rail construction should begin in an urban area like Sacramento or San Diego.

Los Angeles Union station needs to be rebuilt (planned already) before the train is built to and out of the LA Union station.

I agree that the San Francisco segment to Sacramento should be built first. We really need fast rail in California.


I say this although I live in LA.

[reddread]

3. not hardly

they need to traverse the central valley with something slightly better than a two lane highway.
all the benefit lay right there.
everyone comes at this with their personal preference, but without a fair assessment of the totally inadequate
transportation infrastructure we have in a state with a very high gasoline tax,
our roads are a joke, and the need for this transit is highest right here, further from those destinations than Sac to SF. LA and San Diego should be left to their own means anyhow.
the drought will eventually turn us all against each other.

[Xithras]

4. Actually, the first segment should have been built across Tehachapis

The real problem with the HSR program is that it will only be built if voters approve more funds, and polling suggests that voters aren't going to give it any more. There's actually a proposition making its way towards the fall ballot, that currently polls with majority support, that would strip the HSR program of all its existing funding and redirect those funds toward water storage. The previously approved funds will ONLY build the first segment in the southern CV, and it's questionable whether it will even build all of that. And what happens if voters don't approve more funds? Any completed tracks will be handed over to the freight companies for their use. Another corporate giveaway at taxpayer expense.

The Amtrak San Joaquin line is already one of the busiest rail corridors in the nation, running passengers from the Bay Area to Bakersfield at 70MPH many times a day. It doesn't connect to L.A. because the existing Tehachapi rail connections don't have the capacity for passenger service. If the first segment of the new HSR line were built THERE, the new rail corridor would still have provided a huge benefit to Californians by dramatically expanding our passenger rail capabilities even WITHOUT the rest of the system being built.

[ripcord]

5. The problem is that voters feel duped

The initiative they voted for set thresholds for minimum speed, travel times and funding limits, none of those are being met.

[JDPriestly]

6. I ride trains. On certain weekend peaks when the college students ride, there is standing room

only.

If people only knew how comfortable it is to ride the train rather than drive, there would be more support. They should offer free train rides on popular routes for people who have not previously ridden on the train.

Trains are so much better for the long hauls than are cars.

[seabeckind]

2. Fortunately spending details

don't apply to highways and air travel.

Cause everyone knows those are free.

[JDPriestly]

7. I ride the train frequently. I am quite aware of the cost.

It is still so much more comfortable than a car. I arrive unstressed and not as tired as I would after driving the same distance.

I am a huge fan of trains for inter-city trips. The freeways in California are to be avoided at all cost. The trains -- delightful.